Following a series of disputes with Beijing, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has hit back at China, saying that “The Australian people stand up” — paraphrasing a slogan famously associated with Mao Zedong (毛澤東) — to express his nation’s stance against Beijing’s meddling in its national affairs.
While the incident highlights Australia’s increasing awareness of China’s interference and attitude toward Australia, it also points out how China has been exerting influence on governments worldwide.
As a primary target, Taiwan must be careful.
The relationship between Australia and China became tense on Dec. 5, when the Australian government announced that it would introduce a law banning foreign political donations and broadening the legal definition of espionage to prevent foreign powers from influencing domestic politics, with Turnbull citing “disturbing reports about Chinese influence.”
The New York Times and Australian media reported that China had been trying to influence Australian politicians, businesses, schools and media outlets by sending many students and businesspeople to the country to set up their own organizations and by making large political donations.
Earlier this month, it was reported that then-senator Sam Dastyari of the Labour Party had received donations from Chinese businesses and in return supported China’s South China Sea policy.
In response to the news, Turnbull said that the government could not afford to be naive about the threat of foreign interference. Despite Chinese denials and protests, he has maintained his tough attitude.
Australia is just one of many nations that are becoming increasingly aware of China’s political infiltration.
On Dec. 5, the US’ National Endowment for Democracy (NED) issued a report called Sharp Power: Rising Authoritarian Influence, which analyzes techniques used by China and Russia to increase their political influence in other nations.
The report introduces the notion of “sharp power.”
Unlike soft power — which is influence gained through promoting culture and universal values or persuading civil society — and hard power — which means using military force and economic strength — sharp power is defined as the ability to manipulate the dissemination of information to shape perceptions, while concealing its government-led nature.
Sharp power typically targets the media, think tanks and authorities in academia, culture and other areas.
One example of sharp power is the Confucius Institutes that China has founded and established at many universities around the world, NED research officer Jessica Ludwig said.
The ostensible purpose of these institutes is to teach Chinese language, calligraphy and other aspects of Chinese culture, but it often holds exhibitions claiming that Tibet and other neighboring areas are part of China and bans students from discussing Tibet or Taiwan in the classroom.
In addition to promoting non-governmental group exchanges, cultural activities and educational and academic events, China has taken advantage of the democratic environment in other nations to buy up media outlets and provide free information and content with the aim of shaping public opinion on government policy.
A documentary made by China Central Television about the “One Belt, One Road” initiative has been broadcast in many nations, including Taiwan, but few people understand that it was pure propaganda from Beijing.
A look at how China carries out its plans to manipulate perceptions shows that it is not a random approach, but clearly targets influential people, including members of the social elite, policymakers, lawmakers, political party members and former diplomats.
“In the ruthless new competition that is underway between autocratic and democratic states, the repressive regimes’ sharp power techniques should be seen as the tip of their dagger,” the NED report says.
A comparison of China’s methods against Taiwan with the sharp power techniques it uses in other nations reveals the latter as rudimentary.
Due to Taiwan’s national identity disagreements, the changes in government power following the introduction of democracy have led to increased confusion about who the nation’s enemies truly are.
Worst of all has been the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) attempts to collaborate with the Chinese Communist Party to control Taiwanese independence supporters, which has opened the door for China to infiltrate Taiwan.
The NED report says that China has been buying media outlets, bribing people and providing content that promotes its own interests to local institutions in young democracies across central Europe and Latin America, aiming to increase its political influence in those regions.
The same techniques have been used for many years to manipulate Taiwan.
Even worse, some Taiwanese cannot wait until China uses its “united front” strategy to infiltrate and buy its way into Taiwan. Instead, they are traveling to Beijing to offer their loyalty for their own selfish gain or for ideological reasons.
It is preposterous to hear Turnbull’s naive comments about how Australia, an ocean away from China, is unable to handle the onslaught of foreign intervention and threats, while Taiwan — China’s next door neighbor — seems to be doing nothing to prevent China’s infiltration, as retired generals and party officials travel to Beijing to hear lectures from Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and soldiers who serve as Chinese spies are given light sentences and continue to enjoy their government pensions.
As far as China goes, it can infiltrate Taiwan whatever way it wants and it is happy to make the most of this opportunity.
In other young democracies, China might be satisfied with taking aim at opinion leaders who influence public opinion, academia and politicians.
In Taiwan, it behaves like quicksilver, penetrating every crack and crevice: It does not stop at opinion leaders, but starts at the grassroots, taking aim at small and medium-sized businesses, low and medium-income households, central and southern Taiwan, and the eight cities and counties led by KMT mayors and county commissioners, as well as the young generation and the general public.
The means includes offering free travel and study, granting employment and entrepreneurial advantages, poaching talent and offering big salaries.
Meanwhile, there is a group of gangsters and white-collar workers in Taiwan who are willing to aid China in promoting unification.
Fortunately, recent judicial activities — such as amending the definition of “treason” in the Criminal Code and investigating and charging members of the China Unification Promotion Party — seem to show that attitudes toward this pernicious unwillingness to prevent Chinese infiltration are improving.
The Democratic Progressive Party controls the legislative and executive branches of government and cannot afford to take a naive approach to the infiltration and threats that menace Taiwan’s existence.
It is time to take action and effectively stop such activities.
Translated by Tu Yu-an
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS